Devinder Gupta ( 1 ) THESE appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment since questions involved are common and the land acquired, for which compensation is to be determined was also located within the same revenue estate. ( 2 ) ON 2. 12. 1963, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was issued expressing the intention of the Delhi Administration to acquire 85 bighas of land situate in village Kotia mubarakpur for Planned Development of Delhi. After considering objections under Section 5a of the Act declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 12. 12. 1969 for acquiring 51 bigha 16 biswas land out of total land, which had been notified earlier. On 15. 1. 1970 Collector made his award No. 38/69-70 with respect to an area of 39 bighas 10 biswas. The left out area of 8 bigha 4 biswas was found to be built up and for the remaining area of 4 bigha 6 biswas there was stay operating. The Collector Land Acquisition in his award held that lay out plan for the acquired area had been prepared but had not been approved though plotted area had been sold through various sale transactions. Accordingly for the area, which was plotted compensation was offered at the rate of rs. 16,000/- per bigha. For the other gair mumkin area compensation was offered at the rate of rs. 4,000/- per bigha. Feeling dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the claimants sought references. The Reference Court determined the market value at Rs. 19,360. 00 per bigha. Two appeals arise out of the said award being RFA Nos. 317 and 393 of 1979. Land involved in Appeal No. 317/79 is 4 biswas whereas land involved An Appeal No. 393/79 is 19 biswas. ( 3 ) BY another notification issued on 28. 7. 1964 under Section 4 of the Act land measuring 141 bigha 4 biswas was notified for being acquired for same public purpose, namely, Planned Development of Delhi. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 11. 12. 1968 for acquiring an area of 130 bigha 2 biswas. Collector Land Acquisition on 3. 1. 12. 7. 1964 under Section 4 of the Act land measuring 141 bigha 4 biswas was notified for being acquired for same public purpose, namely, Planned Development of Delhi. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 11. 12. 1968 for acquiring an area of 130 bigha 2 biswas. Collector Land Acquisition on 3. 1. 12. 1970 made his award No. 36/70-71 confining it to an area of 2s bigha 14 biswas observing that the remaining area, which had been notified for acquisition will be acquired when necessary directions are received from the Land and Building department, Delhi Administration. The Collector classified the land in Blocks A and B. In block- a the land included was that which was found to be in close proximity of All India Institute of medical Sciences comprised in Khasra N08. 249), 521/250, 522/250,, 251,, 253, 259 and 260 measuring 18 bigha 10 biswas. In Block B remaining area was included, which was lying in the interior. For the land in block A, compensation was offered at the rate of Rs. 17,65b. 00 per bigha and for block b compensation was offered at the rate of rs. 16,000/- per bigha. Feeling dissatisfied the claimants sought reference. The Reference Court held that the claimants were not entitled to any enhancement and thereby rejected the reference by the impugned award dated 11. 9. 1979. RFA No. 560/79 arises out of the said award wherein the claim for compensation is for Rs. 1,00,000. 00 per bigha. Appeal was filed by DLF United Ltd. ( 4 ) YET another notification was issued on 20. 12. 1966 under Section 4 of the Act for the same public purpose, namely, Planned Development of delhi notifying 14 bigha 8 biswas land situate in kotla Mubarak Pur for which declaration was made on 6. 3,1968. The Collector Land Acquisition made his award No. 26/1969 on 1. 12. 1969 offering compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,375. 00 per bigha. Feeling dissatisfied reference was sought by the claimants. The Reference Court by the impugned award dated 7. 12. 1978 assessed the fair market value of the acquired land at Rs. 16,000. 00 per bigha. Still feeling dissatisfied the claimants preferred appeal (RFA No. 149/79 ). Claim in appeal is for compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000. 00 per bigha. Feeling dissatisfied reference was sought by the claimants. The Reference Court by the impugned award dated 7. 12. 1978 assessed the fair market value of the acquired land at Rs. 16,000. 00 per bigha. Still feeling dissatisfied the claimants preferred appeal (RFA No. 149/79 ). Claim in appeal is for compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000. 00 per bigha. ( 5 ) ON behalf of the claimants, reference has been made to a decision of this Court in RFA no. 425/70 (Babu, Lal. v. Union of India) decided on 4. 3. 1996. By the said decision, this Court determined the fair market value of land situate within the same revenue estate of Kotla Mubarak pur, which was acquired for the same public purpose, namely, Planned Development of Delhi through notification issued on 24. 5. 1961. Collector Land Acquisition had in that case offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 3,000. 00 per bigha. The Reference Court had enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs. 11,000. 00 per bigha. Division Bench of this Court while determining the market value noticed the locati-on and situation of village Kotia Mubarakpur and held that it was located in close proximity to developed and developing colonies. Entire area of Kotla mubarakpur had ceased to be agricultural land. Its possibility for being used as building site was tremendous owing to close proximity with residential areas like Andrews Ganj, Defence colony, N. S. D. E. Part I and N. D. S. E. Part II. The entire revenue estate had been declared to be a residential area under the Master Plan. Needless to add that the First Master Plan of Delhi was brought into force on 1. 9. 1962. It was also noticed that Kotla Mubarakpur fell within the area declared for residential purpose by Master Plan of delhi. The Reference Court also held that the land situate in Kotla Mubarakpur was free hold land whereas adjacent colonies for which sale instances were referred were lease hold. Keeping in view the rising trend in prices the Division bench proceeded to determine the fair market value at Rs. 35,000. 00 per bigha. In the same decision it was noticed that within a period of three years from 27. 9. 1958 to the month of October, 1961 there have been tremendous rise in prices of the land in the area in question. Prices had multiplied approximately by four times. 35,000. 00 per bigha. In the same decision it was noticed that within a period of three years from 27. 9. 1958 to the month of October, 1961 there have been tremendous rise in prices of the land in the area in question. Prices had multiplied approximately by four times. ( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimants/appellants mr. C. L. verma in RPA No. 317, 323 and 1. 49/71 contended that the land, which was subject matter in Babu. Lal s case (supra) was a big chunk of land and was not a part of a approved colony whereas the subject matter of the appeals was part of the colony, namely, Triloki Colony, which was surrounded by N. D. 8. E.-1 and in the West Subhash market towards North and East whereas abadi Kotla mubarakpur was towards South. He referred to the statement of AM. 1 Shri Har Sarup Sharma that to the acquired land all facilities like electricity and water were available. Proper roads were laid and it was well laid colony. Acquired land formed part of the colony. From the evidence it appears that though the colony had been laid, lay out plan was not yet approved. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimant in RFA no. 560/79 referred to six sale instances brought on record and also referred to the oral and other documentary evidence on record. In order to substantiate the claimant s plea for further enhancement in the amount of compensation, particularly, he referred to the statement of witnesses examined in the case, namely, AW. 1 Shri ram Charan : AW. 2 Shrt Siri Ram and AM. 3 Shri Ram kishan Jain. Aw. 1 was the Secretary of New Delhi south Extension Co-operative House Building society Ltd. who proved sale deeds Ex. AW. 1/1 and ex. AW. 1/2 saying that the society sold undeveloped plots though the land was demarcated into plots. It was undeveloped and development charges were paid by the purchasers. He stated that the said colony of the society was adjacent to the acquired land, which was the colony developed by d. L. F. known as New Delhi South Extension of d. L. F. He also stated that bus service was available in the year 1961 on the main Ring Road and the colony of D. L. F. was situated on both sides of Ring Road. All other basic amenities like electricity and water were also available. AW. 2 was also the Secretary of New Delhi South extension House Building Co-operative Society Ltd. According to him colony of appellant was known as new Delhi South Extension Part I. Lay Out Plan was approved in or about 1960. He produced original Lay Out Plan Ex. AW. 2/1. Completion certificate of lay out plan Ex. Aw. 2/1 was alsoproved by him stating that the society had sold plots to various purchasers, which were undeveloped and the purchasers were charged development charges. Aw. 3 is the Secretary and general Power of Attorney of the claimant, who proved original completion plan of the two colonies, which according to him were sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. He stated that the acquired land was part of original colonies of New Delhi South Extension Part I and new Delhi South Extension Part II. According to him under the planing practice and requisition of the sanctioned authority the site for building such as for public and schools are necessary and are provided in each colony. Therefore, land in question could not be divided into smaller plots as it was a whole lot by itself duly sanctioned by the concerned authorities. The plot in question had access to the Ring Road. Therefore, all amenities like electricity, water, sewer, market etc. were available. The following table would show the sale instances relied upon and proved on record by the claimants/appellants:- ( 8 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimant/appellant in rfa No. 560/79 also placed reliance upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in (RFA no. 367/79 (DLF United Ltd. v. Union of India and others) decided on 6. 11. 2000 by which decision determination of compensation was made with respect to a plot of land, which had been reserved as a site for school within Haus Khas Colony though technically it was located within the revenue estate of Kherara, Delhi. Taking into consideration the prices at which developed plots had been sold and the largeness of the plot reserved for school the fair market value was determined by allowing deduction of 1/4th for common areas from the market value. Claimants have placed reliance upon, as noticed above, all instances of smaller plots of land with an area ranging from 200 sq. yarda to 428 sq. yards. Claimants have placed reliance upon, as noticed above, all instances of smaller plots of land with an area ranging from 200 sq. yarda to 428 sq. yards. Average price reflected therein for the plots located within the main part of the colony are between rs. 92/- per sq. yards to Rs. 160. 00- per sq. yard during 1961-62. For the plots outside the main kotla Mubarakpur area average price is between rs. 50/- and Rs. 65. 00 per sq. yard. Rise of prices in market trend is evident in case reference is made to sale deed Ex. A4. and Ex. A. 5. By sale deed aw. 4 Smt. Saria Puri is stated to have purchased plot of 250sq. yard on 1. 9. 1961 for a consideration of Rs. 23,,000. 00 at an average rate of rs. 92/- per sq. yard. Same plot was sold by her vide lease deed Ex. A. 5 dated 16. 1. 1962 for a consideration of Rs. 41,500. 00 reflecting the average market value at Rs. 166. 00 per sq. yard. Taking the average of the sale consideration, as reflected in various sale deeds and making deduction to the extent of 1/3rd, we are of the view that in so far as the/ area within block-A, which is subject matter of RFA No. 560/79 deserves to be valued at Rs. 84. 00 per sq. yard. The area falling within block-B deserves to be evaluated at Rs. 68. 00 per sq. yard. Considering the market value of unplotted bigger chunk of land as on 27. 7. 1. 961 in Baby Lal s case (supra) at rs. 35,000/- per bigha, we are of the view that as on 2. 12. 1963 it will not be unreasonable in case for the acquired area, which too was a plot carved out in a colony be not evaluated at rs. 48,000/- per bigha. Also taking into consideration the facts that the area, which was acquired through notification dated 20. 12. 1966 and is subject matter of RFA No. 149/79 being large in size deserves to be evaluated at Rs. 49,000. 00 per bigha. ( 9 ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeals are allowed with proportionate costs. Claimants/appellants in RFA no. 393, 317 and 379 are held entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 48,000. 12. 1966 and is subject matter of RFA No. 149/79 being large in size deserves to be evaluated at Rs. 49,000. 00 per bigha. ( 9 ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeals are allowed with proportionate costs. Claimants/appellants in RFA no. 393, 317 and 379 are held entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 48,000. 00 per bigha and the claimants/appellants in RFA No. 149/79 is held entitled to compensation at the rate of rs. 49000/- per bigha and claimants/appellant in rfa No. 560/79 is held entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 84,000. 00 per biqha for" land falling block A and at the rate of Rs. 68,000. 00 per bigha for land falling in block-B. In addition to market value the claimants will be paid solatium at 15% on the enhanced market value and interest at the rate of 6% p. a. from the date the Collector taking possession till payment. Claimants will also be paid interest on solatium in view of the judgment of supreme Court in view of the decision of Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6271/99 (Sunder v. Union of India) and other connected appeals decided on 19. 9. 2001. ( 10 ) CLAIMANTS in RFA 317, 393 and 560 of 1979 will also be paid interest at the rate of 6% p. a. under Section 4 (3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967 on the market value of the land, as determined by this Court from the date of expiry of period of three years of the date of notification under Section 4 (1) of the act to the date of tender or payment of compensation, which was awarded by the Collector.